Punjab and Haryana High Court Quashes State Election Commission's Cancellation of Panchayat Elections in Punjab J&K High Court Quashes FIR Against Bajaj Allianz, Asserts Insurance Dispute Shouldn’t Be Criminalized Sole Eyewitness's Testimony Insufficient to Sustain Murder Conviction: Madras High Court Acquits Three Accused in Murder Case Presumption of Innocence is Strengthened in Acquittal Cases; Appellate Courts Must Respect Trial Court Findings Unless Clearly Perverse: Delhi High Court NDPS | Physical or Virtual Presence of Accused is Mandatory for Extension of Detention Beyond 180 Days: Andhra Pradesh HC Bombay High Court Quashes Suspension of Welfare Benefits for Construction Workers Due to Model Code of Conduct Section 131 of Electricity Act Does Not Mandate Finalized Transfer Scheme Before Bidding: Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Privatization of UT Chandigarh Electricity Department Revenue Authorities Must Safeguard State Property, Not Indulge in Land Scams: Madhya Pradesh High Court Proposed Amendment Clarifies, Not Changes, Cause of Action: High Court of Jharkhand emphasizing the necessity of amendment for determining real questions in controversy. EWS Candidates Selected on Merit Should Not Be Counted Towards Reserved Quota: P&H High Court Finance Act 2022 Amendments Upheld: Supreme Court Validates Retrospective Customs Authority for DRI Mere Breach Of Contract Does Not Constitute A Criminal Offense Unless Fraudulent Intent Exists From The Start: Delhi High Court Anticipatory Bail Not Intended As A Shield To Avoid Lawful Proceedings In Cases Of Serious Crimes: Allahabad High Court Rajasthan High Court Grants Bail in Light of Prolonged Detention and Delays in Trial U/S 480 BNSS Provision Bombay High Court Orders Disclosure of Candidates' Marks in Public Recruitment Process: Promotes Transparency under RTI Act Maintenance | Father's Duty to Support Daughters Until Self-Sufficiency or Marriage: Karnataka High Court Designation of Arbitration 'Venue' as 'Seat' Confers Exclusive Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Rules in Dubai Arbitration Case Corporate Veil Shields Company Assets from Partition as Joint Family Property: Madras High Court Principal Employers Liable for ESI Contributions for Contract Workers, But Assessments Must Be Fair and Account for Eligibility: Kerala High Court Government Entities Must be Treated Equally to Private Parties in Arbitration Proceedings: Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Resumption of Disciplinary Inquiry Against Storekeeper in Ration Misappropriation Case

Mere Declaration of Civil Death without Further Relief is Very Well Maintainable: Allahabad High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


 In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court has declared that a suit for the mere declaration of civil death is maintainable even without claiming specific consequential relief, particularly in the context of Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. The judgment, delivered by Hon'ble Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, J., on 28th February 2024, in the case of Smt. Raeesa Bano vs. Smt. Tabassum Jahan And Ors., addresses the legal intricacies involved in declaring a person's civil death after being missing for over seven years.

Legal Point: The court delved into the interpretation of Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, juxtaposing it with Section 108 of the Evidence Act, 1872, and Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The main issue revolved around whether a declaration of civil death is barred under Section 34 when no further relief is claimed.

Facts and Issues: Smt. Raeesa Bano, the appellant, sought the declaration of her husband's civil death under Section 108 of the Evidence Act, as he had been missing for over 13 years. Her initial suits were dismissed by the lower courts for not including the Electricity Department, where her husband was employed, and for lack of specific consequential relief claims.

Interpretation of Legal Precedents: The court referred to various precedents, including judgments from the Bombay High Court and previous rulings of the Allahabad High Court, to assert that such a suit is maintainable.

Analysis of Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act: The court observed that Section 34 does not bar a suit for the declaration of civil death but regulates suits that are of a mere declaratory nature without further relief.

Application of Section 9 of CPC: It was noted that all suits of a civil nature are maintainable before civil courts, except those expressly or impliedly barred.

Significance of Civil Death Declaration: Declaring a person's civil death was seen as substantial relief with immediate consequential effects, such as accruing benefits to legal heirs.

No Need for Specific Relief Against Electricity Department: The court highlighted that even without specific relief against the Electricity Department, the suit for declaring the death of Raeesa Bano's husband should not be dismissed as not maintainable under Section 34.

Decision: The Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the judgments of the lower courts. The matter was remanded to the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Mohanlalganj, Lucknow, for a fresh order. The Court directed a quick resolution, considering the evidence already adduced and the uncontested nature of the suit.

Date of Decision: 28th February 2024

Smt. Raeesa Bano vs. Smt. Tabassum Jahan And Ors.'

 

Similar News